Pretend the 223 had never been invented... what caliber for our armed forces?

[Dr_2_B]

A slightly different angle on a popular topic. If the 223 had never been designed, what caliber do you think would have been ideal to equip the US armed services?

 

[unwise11]

.308

 

[788Ham]

I'll have to second that JD, good round.

 

[HOOfan_1]

.280 British maybe

 

[TraditionalCatholic]

I third that. .308 would be a good choice.

 

[Savage99]

A variation of the 6mm Lee Navy would be a more effective round.

 

[Mags]

5.56

 

[Eb1]

Agree with Mags. 5.56

or

.224

 

[fatman4570]

7 x 08

 

[Patrick R]

.222 Or maybe 22-250

 

[highorder]

.276 Pedersen.

 

[zxcvbob]

Since 5.56 is already taken, how about 5.45 Russian?

 

[unwise11]

why do so many people like those little bitty bullets?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

From rounds available about the time of WWI:

.30 Remington with a pointed FMJ bullet.

Or 6.5x50mm Arisaka with a 129gr spitzer bullet.

 

[R.W.Dale]

222 Remington magnum.

5.56x47mm NATO

 

[R.W.Dale]

why do so many people like those little bitty bullets?

Because solders havent really gotten any bigger still seaving us with the problem of ammunition WEIGHT, a problem the 5.56 addressed some 60 years ago.

 

[Justin]

why do so many people like those little bitty bullets?

In general and off the top of my head:
-cheaper to purchase
-cheaper to reload
-low recoil
-easy to train people on
-flatter shooting
-higher magazine capacity
-lighter weight
-ability to develop loads that are accurate out to 600 yards
-acceptable terminal ballistics



Sent from my Android smart phone using Tapatalk.

 

[mshootnit]

I think something almost equally small shooting a 95 gr. 0.243 caliber expanding solid projectile at 3100 fps through screens placed 10 feet in front of the muzzle. The penetrator version would be available too. Barnes TTSX would be good for expansion at all ranges for enemies without body armor, use a penetrator elsewhere. Also I think that squads should be armed with everything from submachine guns to full 30-06 DMR rifles. Cover all your bases.

 

[kwelz]

why do so many people like those little bitty bullets?

Because they work

7.62x51 is a terrible infantry round. It is heavy and overpowered for the needs of your average rifleman.

 

[unwise11]

Big bullet pro's.

better BC in most cases
superior penetration
knock a BG over better
a gut shot will work if it has to
less affected by wind
superior terminal ballistics
defeats body armor faster
more OOMPH and can take out cars if needed.




"7.62x51 is a terrible infantry round. It is heavy and overpowered for the needs of your average rifleman."-Azizza


thanks for your opinion time for facts that it isnt needed?
engagements in afghanistan have left "the average rifleman" wanting more gun, and .308 would solve the issue.
I dont think I would really care how hard I killed the BG as long as I killed him.
and our soldiers dont whine about things like being shot at, I'm sure a bit more weight for more power would be a good thing to them, plus you would need less rounds because .308 is a 1 shot kill kind of gun.

 

[50below]

6.5mm Benchrest with a slightly redesigned sholder/neck.

 

[Coal Dragger]

Well the smart choice would have been something in the 6mm-6.5mm range using a 90-115gr spitzer style bullet pushed to around 2800-3000fps.

 

[mshootnit]

Do I think some of the soldiers should be armed with 308's? Absolutely. But logistical limitations of weight per number of rounds carried and controllability in full auto dictate a much smaller round be there. Problem for me is that 223 is just too borderline on damage caused outside of 200 meters. Also 9mm Luger is a joke. Now thats what we should be talking about! 45 is much better and also could somebody please fire up the 357 Sig locomotive? We need to get that train a ROLLING. 357 Sig has proven to be the auto equivalent of 357 magnum, and the folks at Hornady have stated that the round is absolutely the most uniform round they have ever tested in terms of velocity, and pressure produced. It is also very very reliable in a Semi auto. I got onto it because a federal firearms instructor told me it would be his "IDEAL" cartridge and he wanted it chambered in a compact glock (32) I had one and it was damn nice but I could not shoot the Glock design.

 

[GIJOEL]

Honestly at the time it was adopted the 7.62x39 was and still is a smart combat round. With the only limitation of the 7.62x39 being the trajectory beyond 200 yards, I think a evolution of the tapered case with a 6mm to 6.3mm bullet would have been pretty cool. The tapered case is easy to feed and extract, and the case capacity would be enough to push whatever bullet out to 400-500 yards without any crazy elevation corrections. That brings up another question, are there any wildcats that fit in these parameters?

 

[Caliper_Mi]

If it weren't for NATO, we may have kept the .30-06 going at least as long as .45ACP. Nothing against '06, but it is a bit overkill for most bad guys.

We could go for 7.62x39 or 5.54x39. Hey, they are produced in large numbers and available all over the world!

No, my thoughts on the most ideal would be something 6-7mm caliber with bullet weights in the 75-125 grain area and muzzle energy of 1500-2000 ft*lb. Just browsing the rifle cartridges in Wikipedia, something like a .260 Remington or .257 Roberts looks like a good place to start, but shorten the case somewhat to reduce size/mass.